Salah Uddin habeas writ: ''Find out and bring up' to court

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go here to see INDEX of posts on Salah Uddin disappearance

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This post provides details of the writ of 'Habeas Corpus' lodged in the High Court by the wife of Salah Uddin Ahmed, a  Joint-Vice President of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party,and the spokesperson of the party filed under section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the High Court in Bangladesh in Miscellaneous case no 9932. It also sets out the initial order.

The government response and other documents relating to the habeas corpus writ can be found in the Index above.
-------------

Section 491(1) of the CrPC, titled 'Power to issue directions of the nature of a habeas corpus' states:

The High Court Division may, whenever it thinks fit, direct:-
(a) that a person within the limits of its appellate criminal jurisdiction be brought up before the Court to be dealt with according to law;
(b) that a person illegally or improperly detained in public or private custody with such limits be set at liberty; …..

The respondents in the case are:

(1) the government of Bangladesh represented by the Ministry of Home Affairs
(2) the inspector general of police
(3) the director general of RAB
(4) the additional inspector general of police, Special Branch
(5) the additional inspector general of police, CID
(6) the deputy commissioner
(7) The commissioner, Metropolitan of police
(8) Officer in Charge, police station, Uttara

The application of Salah Uddin's lawyers, which was argued in court on the 12 March, two days after he was allegedly taken by law enforcement agents from the house where he was in hiding, reads as follows:

In the matter of 

‘Inaction of the opposition parties to find out/produce the petitioner husband Salauddin Ahmed before the court to be deal with according to law

   And in the matter

Direction upon the opposition party to find out/produce the petitioners husband Salauddin Ahmed before the court to be dealt with according to law

   And in the matter of

The husband of the petitioner was picked up by the member of the law enforcing authorities on 10.03.2015 at about 10.15 pm from the house no XXXX, Road No 13/B, Uttara, Sector 3, Dhaka

The application then goes onto say

1. That the petitioner’s husband is a law-abiding and permanent citizen of Bangladesh. He comes from a respectable Muslim family of Dhaka. The Petitioner husband is Salauddin Ahmed is the former state minister and MP and Joint Secretary of the Bangladesh Jatiotabadi Dal (BNP). The petitioner’s husband has been picked upon by the law enforcing agencies on 10.03.15 at about 10.15pm from House no XX, Road no 13/B, Uttara, Sector 3, Dhaka. But he has not been produced before any court of law within 24 hours. The petitioner is the next friend of the victims and as such she filed this petition under section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before this Hon’ble Court for immediate remedy. 

2. The petitioner husband is not involved with any subversive activities and he is not a terrorist and he is as a ex-MP and State minister of the country and also setting Joint Secretary of the BNP is a peace loving citizen of the country. 

3. That the petitioner’s husband has been illegally picked up by the law enforcing agency without due process of law. The petitioner’s husband has been illegally confined in the unknown place without initiation of any criminal proceeding against him. 

4. That it is stated that the petitioner intended to lodge a GD on 11.03.2015 to the concerned Police Station stating that the law enforcing agency has picked up her husband on 11.03.2015 but the duty officer of the concerned police station was reluctant to receive any GD and the petitioner searched out here and there. She also searched to the nearest relation of the petitioner and her husband but failed 

5. That it is stated that the petitioner’s husband is picked up by law enforcing agency on 11.03.2015 without any connection with criminal case and without any warrant of arrest of any competent court. The said news had been published in the different newspaper next day. 

6. That is submitted that the petitioner’s husband is an important leader of BNP and he is very respectable and the petitioner’s husband is widely well reputed person in the country and as such the opposite parties may be directed to produce the petitioner husband before the court of law within 24 hours. 

7. That is submitted that the petitioner has no other alternative but to file the instant petition for a direction upon the opposite parties to produce her husband before the court of law to protect himself from harassment an arrest without due process of law and such the opposite parties may be directed to produce the petitioner’s husband before the court of law within 24 hours. 

8. That it is submitted that unless the opposite parties are directed to produce before the court of law the petitioner’s husband right to life, liberty and movement would be infringed and curtailed without due process of law and as such the opposite parties are liable to be directed to produce the petitioner husband before the court of law. 

9. That is submitted that the act of opposite parties is for collateral purpose only to harass and to humiliate the petitioner’s husband at the behest of certain interested quarters in an attempt to undermine the goodwill and image of the petitioner’s husband in the public eye and to further political goals and restrict the freedom of the petitioner’s husband viz a citizen, without due process and law and as such the opposite parties are liable to be directed to produce the petitioner’s husband before the court of law 

10. That it is submitted that the action of the opposite parties not to find out is clear violation of the petitioner husband fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 27, 31, 33 and 36 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh since he is without trace for 3 days and as such the impugned action of the opposite parties is liable to be declared without lawful authority and is of no legal effect 

11. In the premises stated hereinabove, the petition having no other alternative , equally efficacious and expeditious remedy begs to move before the Hon’ble court in its Miscellaneous jurisdiction on the following amongst others

The 'Grounds' in the application are very similar to the paragraphs set out above and so shall not be repeated. The application then stated:

“Wherefore it is moist humbly prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to issue a Rule calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the opposite parties should not be directed to produce the petitioner husband Saluddin Ahmed before the court to be deatl with according to the law within 24 hours and after hearing the parties make the rule absolute and/or pass such other or further order or orders as to your lordships may seem fit and proper.

The order

Following the filing of the application and arguments made by the petitioners lawyers and the Attorney General on 12 March, the bench of Mr Justice Quamrul Islam Siddiqui and Mr Justice Gobinda Chandra Tagore passed the following order.

‘Let a Rule [be] issue[d] calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why they should not be directed to find out and bring up the husband of the petitioner, namely, Salauddin Ahmed before the court on 15.03.2015 at 10.30 am to deal with the matter according to law and/or such other or further order or orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

The Rule is made returnable on Sunday (15.03.2015) from date.